Quote:
Originally posted by PR3SSUR3
Well, I seem to have more than engaged your statements, questions and accusations, so your dismissive comments are plainly incorrect as anyone unbiased reading the thread can see for themselves.
It is not for a man to disprove the incredible theories of another - he can only be expected to prove his alternative explanations. In this case, the idea of creationism is destroyed by evolution delivered through paleontology, and the subsequently weakened concept of a deity has been laid to rest through the simple physics and mathematics that are understood to govern life. And I've given examples of how religion has created worldwide repression and death (and children raping) for many centuries, and that it seems to be on the up and up. Take away the fantastical elements of religion and the doctrines become simply general good sense with no divine or - most importantly for the stability of the planet - extreme consequences that can be threatened by installed 'leaders'. Just think - condoms greenlighted for AIDS and famine-ridden African countries.
It's a much better state of affairs all round. Of course if you're asking me to prove that people do not need religion then you're going to have to be patient - it will take time to get round everyone, and I am not a magician like that Jesus and David Blane.
I have enough experience with the subject - maybe less than you, maybe more than you... who knows?
Coke snorting Freud made groundbreaking observations of the human mind and behaviour that today's wayward neurotic children are unlikely to take kindly to. In these casual pill popping times, it's no wonder.
Now, are you angry because you cannot accept your mutated lack of penis?
;)
|
The theory isn't the point. YOU brought it into the conversation, YOU back up YOUR point. End of story. As for your "alternative explanation", you haven't offered any. All you've said is that God doesn't exist. Well, that's one of your main points of argument, so back it up.
You have given NO examples of how RELIGION has cause any of the things you have described. PEOPLE did it, and you haven't given one single credible argument as to why one should shift the blame away from people. You bring up science and logic, but you have so far used neither as a part of your argument. You have an unbelieveably biased view against something you know very little to nothing about (looking up things to back up your "religion is bad" argument doesn't count), and you're turning this into a circular argument.
No, you have not given a credible argument to blame religion for the atrocities done in its name. The only thing you've said is that "People did bad things in the name of religion, and people don't need religion, therefore it's religion's fault" and that is a terrible argument.
You brought up Freud, found out that his theories are being all but done away with nowadays, and just insult the "wayward neurotic children" and "pillpoppers" who don't give a shit about Freud anymore, just because invoking the name of Almighty Freud didn't work.
And then, GASP, resort to petty (there's that word again) insults. Aw, Haunted has a mutated crotch, that just totally negates anything she says, doesn't it? It's not that YOU'RE wrong (you are), it's that she's mad about her groin! BRILLIANT!
Ad Hominems just make it seem like you're grasping at straws. I mean, one could easily point out that you're being an arrogant, bigoted asshole who's trying to be Oh So Trendy by using all of his logic (which you have referred to, but never used) and science (see: logic) to debunk that retarded-ass religion stuff. I could even throw in a sarcastic "you're so cool" and add a smiley face at the end, maybe a :cool: or something. It would be easy, but why do it? It doesn't argue any points, it doesn't back up anything that anybody says, it just attacks the person who's making the points. And if we're gonna do that then just give me a minute and I can start up an AIM chat room and we gan discuss this like real 8th graders.